Budget-cutting Zeal Sends A Clear Message To Clinton

ANALYSIS

WASHINGTON — Capitol Hill lawmakers had the chance this week to make deep cuts in the nation's massive federal budget. But they blinked.

Still, Monday night's narrow House defeat of $90 billion in belt-tightening over the next five years served notice on President Clinton that he must reckon with a growing coalition of budget-cutters from both political parties.

By Capitol Hill standards, House members have gone on a spending-cut rampage this fall, killing the Superconducting Super Collider and twice coming close to abolishing NASA's planned space station.

The anti-spending mood has challenged White House control over its legislative agenda, threatening to hinder Clinton's plans for new spending next year on health reform, education, job training and public works projects.

''I don't know how we can see a striving economy with more government spending putting a drag on small business,'' said Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Ocala, one of 12 in Florida's 23-member House delegation who backed the defeated spending-cut plan.

When lawmakers come back to work in January - after a two-month break among the voters - bipartisan zeal for budget cuts could be stronger than ever.

''We have been successful even without passing our proposals,'' said Rep. Jim Bacchus, D-Merritt Island, the only Florida Democrat who voted for Monday's failed budget-reduction plan. ''We have clearly shown that we want more spending cuts and we want to do them now.''

The House voted 213-219 late Monday night against the so-called Penny-Kasich plan, named for its authors, Reps. Tim Penny, D-Minn., and John Kasich, R-Ohio. Clinton's modest $37 billion budget-cutting package, mostly federal work force reductions he already had announced, won by a wide margin.

The closeness of the vote on Penny-Kasich's $90 billion in new cuts stunned many in Congress. The plan won strong support despite ferocious opposition from Washington's leading interest groups. It would have inflicted political pain on lawmakers, hardly the sort of proposal that wins 213 House votes.

About one-third, or $27 billion, of the Penny-Kasich cuts would have come from Medicare savings, imposing ''means testing'' to require wealthier retirees to pay a larger share of their medical costs. That incurred the legendary wrath of the American Association of Retired Persons, one of the nation's most powerful lobbying groups.

The Penny-Kasich plan also antagonized the defense establishment with its call for $26 billion in more cuts for the Pentagon, foreign aid and domestic programs. Secretary of Defense Les Aspin said the plan would destroy military morale.

Another $27 billion in savings would have come from federal layoffs, provoking opposition from labor unions.

The most significant feature of the Penny-Kasich plan was its scheme to ''lock-in'' savings, often left out of most budget-reduction proposals. It would have lowered the government's spending ceilings, imposing real cuts instead of matching the ceilings already set.

''This plan goes to the heart of the power structure in Washington,'' Penny said during Monday's House debate on his proposed cuts.

And the power structure lowered the boom this week on anyone who might vote for Penny-Kasich.

House spending chiefs sent threatening letters to members citing projects in their districts that could be cut if they voted for Penny-Kasich. Central Florida congressmen were told that they might lose funding for a planned annex to Orlando's federal courthouse and a restoration project for the Kissimmee River.

''It was an absolute outrage to threaten that if they vote to cut the deficit, they are going to be punished,'' Kasich said. ''The plan was within striking distance of victory, but with these kinds of tactics, I don't know how you withstand it.''

Penny and Kasich vow to resume their bipartisan battle in January. They have allies in the Senate, where the next fight is likely to occur.

Sen. Bob Kerrey, D-Neb., leads a bipartisan group of 15 senators, including Bob Graham, D-Fla., that is proposing $109 billion in cuts over the next five years - roughly a third from mandatory spending such as Medicare cost-of-living increases, a third from administrative costs and a third from domestic programs.

The test for these plans - Kerrey's in the Senate and a revived Penny-Kasich package in the House - will be whether lawmakers can negotiate their way between the public's vague demand for cuts and the fierce opposition to specific proposals. For now, many in Congress appear ready to challenge voters who want cuts without sacrifice.

''My district is a little schizophrenic on the issue of cutting spending,'' said Bacchus, who represents many retirees, NASA workers and military contractors. ''They are conservatives, skeptical of government spending, but in some respects they are totally dependent on it. They want to have their spending and cut it, too.''